Availability and Advice on Test Uptake During the COVID-19 Pandemic: a Vignette Study on Lateral Flow Testing Policy in the Netherlands.
试验速览
- 阶段
- 不适用
- 状态
- 已完成
- 发起方
- 入组人数
- 3,270
- 试验地点
- 2
- 主要终点
- Average strategy sensitivity over time: day 1
研究概览
简要总结
Lateral Flow Testing (LFT) use for COVID-19 related symptoms continues to rise, despite governmental advice to test at a test facility. In this study we investigate whether 1) adjusting the governmental testing advice will lead to a collective increase of people who test with COVID-19 symptoms and if this leads to a higher strategy sensitivity.
详细描述
In an online randomised multi-factorial survey (vignette study) participants are randomised to assess four scenario's. Between subject testing advise is randomised (IV1; 2 levels) and the availability of LFT (IV2; 2 levels). Within subject we asked participants to assess their most likely behaviour on day 1 of symptoms and day 3 of unchanged symptoms (IV3; 2 levels). Corona-related symptoms are randomly presented (IV4; 4 levels) and new incidences of symptoms are presented in additional vignettes describing new months (IV5; 4 levels).
Subjects are asked to immerse themselves in the scenario's before answering what their most likely behaviour would be: a) go to a test facility b) use a LFT c) wait and see or 4) no test. Participants who didn't choose the test facility on day 1 were presented with the same vignette on day 3 with unchanged symptoms, and were asked their most likely behaviour again.
After assessing the scenario's, participants fill in a questionnaire assessing demographics, behavioural determinants related to test behaviour, vaccine status, current symptoms and previous experience with Corona and testing.
The primary outcomes is defined as the average strategy sensitivity over time and therefore the chance of detecting a Covid-infection. Average strategy sensitivity is calculated by converting the choice of testing behaviour into the corresponding sensitivity score (PCR =1, LFT day 1 = .8, LFT day 3 = .7, wait and see and no test = 0), averaged over four scenario's.
Our primary hypothesis is:
研究设计
- 研究类型
- Interventional
- 分配方式
- Randomized
- 干预模型
- Factorial
- 主要目的
- Prevention
- 盲法
- Double (Participant, Investigator)
入排标准
- 年龄范围
- 18 Years 至 —（Adult, Older Adult）
- 性别
- All
- 接受健康志愿者
- 是
入选标准
- •Participants were recruited from an online research panel representative for the Dutch population.
- •Inclusion Criteria:
排除标准
- 未提供
结局指标
主要结局
Average strategy sensitivity over time: day 1
时间窗: average strategy sensitivity day 1
The sensitivity of the test chosen was used to convert each answer: test facility on day 1 = 1, LFT on day 1= 0.8, Wait and see or No test = 0. Sensitivity scores were then averaged over the four scenario's.
Maximum average strategy sensitivity over time
时间窗: maximum average strategy sensitivity day 1 and 3
The sensitivity of the test chosen was used to convert each answer: test facility on day 1 or day 3 = 1, LFT on day 1= 0.8, LFT on day 3= 0.7, Wait and see or No test = 0. Sensitivity scores were then averaged over the four scenario's. The highest score of day 1 and day 3 was used to calculate the maximum sensitivity score.
次要结局
- Willingness to test - maximum(Day 1 and 3)
- Type of test chosen day 3(Day 3)
- Type of test chosen day 1(Day 1)
- Willingness to test day 1(Day 1)
研究者
Colene Zomer
Researcher Corona Behavioural Unit
National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM)